Les NTIC et la formation à distance : vers une industrialisation insolite?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inspiré par les études traitant de l’industrialisation de la formation, qui analysent le rôle joué par les nouvelles technologies de l’information et de la communication (NTIC), ce texte examine dans quelle mesure les questions soulevées par ce courant de recherche trouvent une résonance dans la pratique de la formation à distance. Il aborde notamment la question des gains de productivité attendus de leur introduction, la confrontation entre la logique marchande et la logique civique qui l’accompagne et la nature de la médiation pédagogique dans les nouveaux environnements d’apprentissage. Par ailleurs, sont mis en évidence d’autres paramètres qui conditionnent le succès de l’implantation des NTIC, par exemple la possibilité de formaliser les contenus, les conditions de travail qui accompagnent l’insertion des technologies et les compromis à effectuer entre les exigences pédagogiques et les contraintes techniques et financières. Prenant acte de la pénétration de certaines technologies, ce texte laisse ainsi entrevoir l’émergence d’une industrialisation insolite prenant la forme d’un « artisanat industriel » peut-être porteur de gains pédagogiques appréciables.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".